With its economy battered, “inconsistent and illogical” lockdown rules, and lack of coordination at the highest levels of the government, Israel can’t be said to have avoided mistakes in its handling of the pandemic. While adding much else to this list of complaints, and acknowledging that much yet remains to be seen, David Horovitz finds that there is much more to praise:

As of this writing, Israel, population 9.2 million people, has suffered 219 fatalities in the coronavirus pandemic. Of the nearly 16,000 confirmed cases, more than half have now recovered. Fewer than 100 Israelis are currently on ventilators. Compare those figures to other countries.

By [one estimate], Israel has 25 fatalities per million citizens—which puts it at about 50th in the world, and better than the global average. With many countries providing less reliable statistics, furthermore, Israel’s global ranking is actually almost certainly considerably better. By no means peerless, but striking nonetheless.

Israel’s relative success, as reflected in [the] comparative statistics, . . . is prompting growing calls for Israel to reverse the norm by which Diaspora Jewry rushes to help it at times of emergency, and to reach out urgently with effective assistance to a Diaspora in pandemic crisis.

[T]hose numbers above underline that, turning 72 in these nightmare circumstances, Israel has at least wary cause for encouragement. They were not always perfectly executed, but the decisions Israel’s leaders and authorities made, and that its citizens generally heeded, were designed to maximize the defense against a mysterious virus that disproportionately targeted the elderly—our parents, our pioneers. For now, the numbers and the comparisons suggest, that strategy has been remarkably effective.

Early Friday morning, Israel attacked military installations near the Iranian cities of Isfahan and nearby Natanz, the latter being one of the hubs of the country’s nuclear program. Jerusalem is not taking credit for the attack, and none of the details are too certain, but it seems that the attack involved multiple drones, likely launched from within Iran, as well as one or more missiles fired from Syrian or Iraqi airspace. Strikes on Syrian radar systems shortly beforehand probably helped make the attack possible, and there were reportedly strikes on Iraq as well.

Iran itself is downplaying the attack, but the S-300 air-defense batteries in Isfahan appear to have been destroyed or damaged. This is a sophisticated Russian-made system positioned to protect the Natanz nuclear installation. In other words, Israel has demonstrated that Iran’s best technology can’t protect the country’s skies from the IDF. As Yossi Kuperwasser puts it, the attack, combined with the response to the assault on April 13,

clarified to the Iranians that whereas we [Israelis] are not as vulnerable as they thought, they are more vulnerable than they thought. They have difficulty hitting us, but we have no difficulty hitting them.

Nobody knows exactly how the operation was carried out. . . . It is good that a question mark hovers over . . . what exactly Israel did. Let’s keep them wondering. It is good for deniability and good for keeping the enemy uncertain.

The fact that we chose targets that were in the vicinity of a major nuclear facility but were linked to the Iranian missile and air forces was a good message. It communicated that we can reach other targets as well but, as we don’t want escalation, we chose targets nearby that were involved in the attack against Israel. I think it sends the message that if we want to, we can send a stronger message. Israel is not seeking escalation at the moment.